So, being C-A for Tier 2 is like having
faux-5D power?
Define a “significant” 5D space compared to a “insignificant” one, please.
My cosmology’s 5D space is insignificant despite containing an infinite amount of 4DSTCs? What if I said the 5D space is infinite in size? Would it still be insignificant?
Insignificant is basically sizes that is not universal in size in said dimension
you know how if you have a graph
imagine a solid square with a value of 5 on each side
now imagine each universe is 1 line
now the square simply has a value of 5 and we don't know if it's cm, meters, etc. but we know it is insignificant because it is too small.
now you know how the number of lines between 0-1 and 1-2 is already infinite because of how infinitely small each line is they don't have the value vertically and only horizontally
that's basically where the issue is.
if an infinite amount of dimension can be kept in as small as 1 measure or even less
then that is so insignificant that it is not notable let alone universal in size in 5D space
thus it is an insignificant size with unknown value.
now it doesn't matter if the universe (assumed as a line) is infinite in size
their vertical value will not change and remain null. but we do know that you can store infinite of them and it will still be a measurable value between 0-1 or even less
now if the cosmology space is said to be 5 dimensional and infinite in size
it would no longer be insignificant unless it is portrayed wrongly that it doesn't really appear as such.
in that case, the latter would need a case by case evaluation. but generally being said to be 5 dimensional in space would often be sufficient
but allegory or phrasing such as the space between dimension/universe is infinite often do not qualify because that could also refer to the insignificant 5D space
because an insignificant 5D space can and may appear infinite in 4D scale perspective but still minuscule in 5D sense